Theme

The load must go somewhere — page 7

Essays 145 to 168 of 450 on this thread, in the same order.
The tendon is a load, pointing the other way. A 14 m beam with a parabolic tendon dropping 260 mm to midspan, stressed to 1440 kN after losses. Its curvature pushes the beam up along its whole length with an intensity of 8Pe/L² = 15.28 kN/m, against an applied 17.63 kN/m — so 2.34 kN/m is left to bend anything, and the beam carries 57.4 kNm where an unstressed one carries 432 kNm. What the section then feels is 6.40 MPa of uniform compression and very little else. Internal forces

The load that comes from changing direction

A force that travels in a straight line asks nothing of anything. Bend its path and it asks for a transverse load of F over R along every millimetre of the curve, and that load is real, is nowhere on the load schedule, and is the same statement behind a prestressing tendon, a hoop force, an arch thrust and a web that buckles with nothing applied to it.

A section has two areas and the tables give one of them. Peak shear stress divided by the mean, for four sections of exactly the same gross area and depth. The mean is V/A and is the number a first calculation uses; the peak is what the material actually sees, and the ratio between them is a property of shape alone. A rectangle's is 1.5 — the parabola's peak over its average — and it is one of the few numbers in this subject that is exactly derivable and universally ignored. An I-section's is near 1.98, and the reason is on the second bar: 97% of the shear is inside a web that is 56% of the area. So the flanges carry the moment and almost none of the shear, and the web carries the shear and almost none of the moment — which is why a shear check on an I-section uses the web area and a moment check uses the whole section, and why the two checks are about two different pieces of steel. Sections and stress

The section has two areas

A shear force divided by the area of the section is not the shear stress anywhere in it. A rectangle's peak is exactly one and a half times that number and an I-section's web carries nearly all of the shear over a fifth of the area, which is why a moment check and a shear check on the same member are checks on two different pieces of steel.

Two curvatures of opposite sign, which is what makes it a structure. A cable net over a 36 m square, drawn as the two families of cables that are also the two rulings of the surface. One family sags and carries downward load by hanging; the other rises and carries upward load — wind uplift, and a load reversal anywhere — by the same mechanism upside down. Neither can do anything alone. A single family of cables is a mechanism: it changes shape freely under any load pattern it was not tensioned for, and the shape it moves to is decided by the load rather than by the designer. Put the two together and each is the other's restraint, but only if they are pulled against one another first — the pretension of 520 kN in the sagging family and 715 in the hogging one is a self-equilibrating state that exists with no load on the roof at all, and it is what turns two mechanisms into one structure. The curvatures are drawn four times their true value: a real net of this span sags 2.2 m over 36, which is flatter than it looks anywhere. Structural form

Two curvatures of opposite sign

A single family of cables is not a structure. It is a mechanism that takes whatever shape the load asks for, and it will do that under any load pattern it was not tensioned for. Cross it with a second family curved the other way, pull the two against each other, and the pair becomes stiff — with no bending anywhere and no material property involved in the stiffness at all.

Two drawings of one deck, and they are not the same structure. A 112 m viaduct on five supports, articulated two ways. Above, the fixed point is at the left abutment: the far end has to be given 45 mm of movement, and the friction of every sliding bearing runs one way, so the fixed support takes 660 kN before any wind or braking is applied. Below, the fixed point is at the middle pier: the largest joint halves to 22 mm and the friction now cancels across the fixed point, leaving 0 kN. The movement arrows are drawn at 900 times the scale of the deck, because a 45 mm movement on a 112 m span is thinner than the line the deck is drawn with. Nothing about the deck, the loads or the ground has changed between the two. Structural form

Where the structure is allowed to move

One drawing decides how big every movement joint on a bridge is and where every horizontal force goes, it takes an afternoon, and it appears on no calculation sheet. Move the fixed point from an abutment to the middle pier and the largest joint halves and the horizontal force on that support drops from the whole of the friction to none of it.

The two braces balance until one of them buckles. An inverted-V brace after the compression member has gone. While both braces are elastic they carry equal and opposite forces and their vertical components cancel on the beam above, which is why the beam in a chevron bay is usually sized for gravity alone. The compression brace buckles at 445 kN and then sheds most of what it was carrying — 30% is left here — while the tension brace goes on to yield at 1065. The difference between the two vertical components is 659 kN, applied at the middle of the span with no help from either brace, and it asks the beam for 1317 kNm against the 200 kNm the gravity load asks for — 6.6 times as much. The beam drawn does not: 1517 kNm against a capacity of 731. The force is not a load case anybody applies; it is what the frame leaves behind on its way to the state it will actually be in. Structural form

The force the brace leaves behind

Two braces meeting under a beam carry the storey shear as a tension and a compression whose vertical components cancel, so the beam above sees nothing. They cancel only while both braces are elastic. Once the compression brace buckles it sheds most of its force, the tension brace goes on to yield, and the difference is a point load at midspan that nobody applied.

Effective length is a property of the storey. The effective length factor of the one column that resists sway, against the total gravity load on the storey as a multiple of its own. At the left-hand end it carries the storey alone and its K is 1.99 — the 2.0 every chart gives a column fixed at the base and free to sway at the top, reproduced here by a route that never mentions a chart. Then columns are added that have pinned bases and therefore no lateral stiffness whatever. They contribute load and nothing else, so they cannot buckle on their own and they lower the load at which everything buckles together. K rises as the square root of the load ratio, exactly, and at the storey drawn — three leaning columns carrying 69% of the gravity load — it is 3.57. That is off the end of every published alignment chart, and the leaning columns themselves, which a designer would take at K = 1.0 for pinned ends, are at 2.54. Stability

The column that leans on its neighbours

A column with a pinned base and a pinned top has no lateral stiffness at all and cannot stand up alone, and yet thousands of them do. What holds them is the rest of the storey, and what it costs is paid by whichever columns do have stiffness — whose effective length rises as the square root of the load being leaned on them, straight off the end of every chart.

A transverse load with nothing applied. Web slenderness against web thickness, with the limit the flange's own curvature sets. A flange carrying 6213 kN and curved to a radius of 592 m needs 10.5 N per millimetre of radial force to stay on its curve, and the only thing available to supply it is the web. Nothing has been applied to the girder: the load comes from the deflected shape, which is why a straight beam has none of it and a beam at a plastic hinge has a great deal. Setting the radial force against the web's own plate-buckling resistance gives, in four lines, h_w/t_w ≤ k·(E/f_yf)·√(A_w/A_fc) — the form the codes use, arrived at without them. The constants differ: an elastic flange strain gives k = 1.34 and the rule uses 0.3, a factor of 4.5, and the gap is the curvature assumed. k goes as the inverse square root of the flange strain, so 0.3 is a flange strained to 3.4% — which is what a plastic hinge does to it. The rule is not conservative; it is written about a different beam. Stability

The web that is crushed from inside

A plate girder's compression flange is curved by the beam's own deflection, and a curved force needs a transverse load to stay on its curve. The only thing available to supply it is the web. So a deep girder can buckle its web vertically with nothing applied to it at all, and the rule that prevents it is the only clause in the codes about a load no load case contains.

A bearing capacity is a mechanism, and here it is. Prandtl's collapse mechanism under a 3.0 m footing in a soil of 32° friction. A rigid wedge is driven down with the footing at 61° to the horizontal; a fan of radial shear turns the stress through exactly ninety degrees on a logarithmic spiral whose growth rate is tanφ; and a passive wedge at 29° has to be pushed up and out of the way. Nothing here is empirical — every angle is a function of φ alone — and the mechanism reaches 15.9 m from the centre, which is 10.6 times the footing's half width. That is why two footings closer together than about four widths do not have separate bearing capacities. Equilibrium

The ground is a mechanism

Bearing capacity is met as a formula with three terms and a table of coefficients, and that presentation hides what it is. Underneath is a plastic collapse mechanism — a rigid wedge, a fan of radial shear on a logarithmic spiral, and a passive wedge that has to be pushed up and out of the way — and every coefficient in the table is a property of that one drawing.

The check that everything adds up, and the error it cannot see. Four versions of the same 3-bay, 4-storey frame, with the global equilibrium residual each one produces — the sum of the reactions against the sum of the applied loads, as a fraction of the applied total. It is the first thing every analysis prints and it is worth having: a lost restraint and a load entered in the wrong unit both show up immediately, at 8% and 32%, because both change what the structure is carrying. The fourth bar is the point. A member whose stiffness is wrong by a factor of ten redistributes the internal forces completely — the second bar shows the change in the member forces, 24% — and the global residual is exactly zero, because the wrong answer is still in equilibrium with the same loads. Equilibrium is one equation per degree of freedom of the whole body, and a stiffness error lives entirely in the many equations underneath it. A model can satisfy every equilibrium check ever devised and be a model of a different structure. Equilibrium

The check that cannot see the error

Every analysis prints a global equilibrium residual, and it is the first thing anybody looks at. It catches a lost restraint and a load entered in the wrong unit immediately. It is structurally incapable of catching a member whose stiffness is wrong by a factor of ten, because the wrong answer is still in equilibrium with the same loads.

The gap is a sum of five things and only one of them is computed. What a 30 mm movement joint is asked to accommodate, by three combination rules. The top bar is every term at its extreme, added: 33.2 mm, which assumes the hottest day, the fullest floor, the whole of the shrinkage and the worst-placed wall arrive together. The chance of that is about 1.5%. The bottom bar treats them as independent and asks for 16.0 mm. The middle bar is the rule used for actions and almost never for movements — one term at its full value and the rest at their coincidence factors — and gives 25.5 mm. The segments across the top bar are the terms themselves, and the ordering is the finding: the largest is tolerance at 10.0 mm, which is not a structural quantity at all, and the smallest is deflection at 3.2 mm — the only one anybody computes carefully, and 10% of the total. Deflection

The gap nobody computed

A movement joint is sized by adding up everything the structure will do to it, and the deflection calculation — the only term anybody computes carefully — is usually the smallest one in the list. The largest is a construction tolerance, which is not a structural quantity at all, and the sum of the extremes is nearly twice what treating them as independent would ask for.

The strength was bought in a furnace and the welder gives it back. Proof stress as delivered and beside a weld, for four aluminium alloys. The heat-treated alloys lose half of it: the strength of a 6xxx extrusion is in precipitates formed by an ageing treatment, and the arc dissolves them for 32 mm either side of the weld, permanently. The work-hardened tempers lose nearly as much, because the heat undoes exactly the work. The annealed ones lose nothing at all, because there is nothing left in them to anneal. The consequence is the crossover: 5083-H22 is 1.04 times 6061-T6 as delivered and 0.92 times it once welded, so the stronger alloy is the weaker member. The 240 mm member drawn, with two longitudinal welds, keeps 87% of its parent capacity — a weld along a member softens a strip and leaves a section, and the same weld across it softens the whole of one. Materials

The strength the welder gives back

A 6082-T6 extrusion is twice as strong as a 5083-H111 plate and, welded across, the two are within a few per cent of each other. The heat of the arc anneals the metal for thirty millimetres either side, permanently, and the strength that was bought in a furnace is given back at the first joint.

The bearing that is drawn as a roller. The horizontal force a sliding bearing delivers, against the vertical load it is carrying, with its coefficient of friction on the same picture. The coefficient is not a constant: PTFE's falls as the contact pressure rises, and the standard fit is μ = 1.2/(10 + σ), so the bearing drawn is at 30.0 N/mm² and μ = 0.030 while the same bearing at a fifth of the load is at 0.075 — 2.5 times as much. The force curve is therefore strongly non-linear: a fifth of the load gives 50% of the force. Two readings follow and only one of them is usually taken. The largest force is at full load, 108 kN, and that is what the pier is designed for. The largest nuisance is at light load, where 54 kN of friction is 39% of the 140 kN of wind the bearing was put there to release the structure from. Cold makes it worse again: below about −5 °C the same bearing delivers 216 kN. A roller symbol on a drawing means this, and it is a pair of load cases rather than one, because friction opposes whichever way the deck happens to be going. Connections

The roller that is not a roller

A sliding bearing is drawn as a roller and detailed as a sheet of PTFE, and it delivers a horizontal force of a few per cent of whatever it is carrying. The coefficient everybody quotes is the one at full design pressure, and PTFE's coefficient rises as the pressure falls — so the bearing is at its freest exactly where nobody checks it.

The hinge is at mid-height in exactly no storey. The height of the point of contraflexure in each column of a 4-storey, 3-bay frame under lateral load, as a fraction of the storey height, against the portal method's assumption that it is at the middle. The exact solution is a plane-frame stiffness analysis of the same frame. In the bottom storey the zero sits at 0.609 of the height, because a fixed base is stiffer than the joint above it and takes more of the column's moment; in the top storey it sits at 0.359, because there is no column above to share that joint. The average over the whole frame is 0.475, which is why the assumption survives — it is right on average and wrong everywhere. The worst error in the storey shear share is 25%, and the column shears still add to the storey shear to 0e+0 of it, because the method is exact statics applied to an assumed structure. Internal forces

The analysis that assumes the answer

A rigid frame is indeterminate, so statics cannot finish it. The hand methods finish it anyway, by assuming where the bending moment is zero and treating those points as hinges. That is not a shortcut around the analysis — it is a different kind of answer, exact in equilibrium and wrong in compatibility, and knowing which half is which is what makes the error a bound rather than a mystery.

Two of these move and the third cannot. The first span of a 3-span beam under 5 kN/m, with the stiffness of the middle span swept over a factor of 25. The support moment and the mid-span moment both move — that is what redundancy does, and it is the whole reason a continuous beam has to be analysed rather than read off. Their combination does not: the mid-span ordinate plus the average of the two end moments is 30.6 kNm at every point on this axis, which is wL²/8 for this span and this load and contains nothing else. The largest departure anywhere on the sweep is 2.3e-16 of the value, which is the arithmetic of the stiffness solution rather than a property of the beam. Continuity buys a distribution and not a capacity, and this is the line that says so. Internal forces

Two of these move and the third cannot

Cut one span of a continuous beam free and add up the forces on it. What comes out is that the mid-span moment plus the average of the two end moments equals the free bending moment of that span, with nothing else in it — no stiffness, no support settlement, no analysis at all. Continuity moves moment about. It does not reduce the total, and it never has.

The edge, and the length over which it is forgotten. A cylinder of radius 4.00 m and wall 12 mm under 0.6 N/mm² of internal pressure, held at its base. Away from the base the wall carries the pressure as pure hoop tension and bends nowhere, which is why a pressure vessel is a cylinder. At the base the hoop force is zero, because the wall cannot grow there, and the difference is made up by a boundary layer of bending that dies out inward. The length it dies out over is 1/β = 170 mm — 0.778√(Rt), a geometric mean of the radius and the thickness — and the moment is under a twentieth of its edge value by 3.07 of them. Nothing in that length is the load. The base moment is p/2β², and the bending stress it produces is 1.82 times the membrane hoop stress the whole design is about, at every pressure, every radius and every thickness: the ratio is √3/√(1 − ν²) and contains none of them. The hoop force overshoots by 4.3% at 3.2 lengths in, which is the wall springing back past where it was going. Internal forces

The length a structure was never given

A disturbance applied at one place dies out over a distance, and the distance is not something anybody chose. A beam forgets a badly applied load over its own depth. A beam on the ground forgets a point load over the fourth root of its stiffness against the soil's. A shell forgets a held edge over the square root of the radius times the thickness — a geometric mean of two lengths three orders of magnitude apart, which is neither of them and is not near either.

The steel that is sized by the concrete. Ultimate moment of a 1000 × 400 mm section against the area of tension steel in it, with the moment that cracks the section drawn across. The cracking moment is 77.2 kNm and contains no steel at all — it is f_ctm times the gross section modulus, 2.90 N/mm² times bh²/6 — so it is a horizontal line, and every section to the left of where the two meet is one whose first crack is its failure. The crossing is at 507 mm², and rearranging the two expressions gives 0.245·(f_ctm/f_yk)·bd against the 0.26 the codes print — the constant is a section modulus divided by a lever arm and not a fitted number. The rule as printed asks for 538 mm² here, which is 6% more than the derivation needs, and that margin is the whole of the safety in a check whose failure mode is sudden. Sections and stress

The steel the concrete asks for

Every other bar in a concrete member is there because of an action. This one is there because of the member itself — enough steel that the cracked section can carry more than the moment that cracked it, so that the first crack is not also the failure. The requirement contains no load, and both of its consequences run the wrong way round.

The same steel, and a crack three times as wide. Calculated crack width against bar diameter, with the area of steel held at 1340 mm² per metre throughout — so the spacing changes with the square of the diameter and the amount of reinforcement does not change at all. The width runs from 0.173 mm at 8 mm bars to 0.372 at 25, a factor of 2.15 for identical steel. The reason is in the crack spacing: after a crack forms the bar has to re-anchor the concrete's tensile force before the next one can, and the length that takes is proportional to the bar's diameter. Of the 337 mm spacing drawn, 35% is the cover term and 65% is the bar term — and the cover term is the one that puts crack control and durability in opposition, because cover protects the bar and widens the crack that reaches it. Sections and stress

The same steel, and a wider crack

A crack's width is the distance between cracks times the strain the steel carries over that distance. Neither of those is decided by how much reinforcement there is. The spacing is a bond length, so it goes as the bar diameter; the strain is set by the stress in the steel. Two arrangements of identical steel can differ by a factor of two in crack width, and the one that wins is the one with more, smaller bars.

The prop load is decided by the digging, not by the hole. Prop forces in a 12 m excavation propped at 3 levels, with the force each prop reaches at any stage of the sequence drawn thick and the force the finished arrangement gives it drawn thin. The pale dots are the individual stages. The middle prop reaches 214 kN while the dig is at 9.5 m and finishes at 88 — a factor of 2.44 between the two, and the larger one is not in the final analysis anywhere. Terzaghi and Peck's apparent pressure diagram, a rectangle of 49.4 kN/m², reproduces the total of the staged maxima to 2% — which is what it is: an envelope of measured prop loads, back-figured into a pressure, and a shape nothing on a wall is ever loaded with. Structural form

Every prop has its own worst day

A braced excavation has no finished state worth analysing. It is dug in stages, a level of props goes in at each stage, and a prop's force is largely fixed the moment it is installed — so the force to design it for is the largest it sees during a sequence that appears on no calculation sheet, and which for the middle prop here is nearly two and a half times what the finished arrangement gives.

The group is not weaker; it is very much softer. A 3 × 3 pile cap on the left, with each pile's share of 9.0 MN and 4.5 MNm in meganewtons — N/n plus M·y/Σy², the same three terms in the same order as a bolt group under an eccentric load and a section under biaxial bending. The corner piles take 1.25 times the average and a pile added at the centroid would change that by nothing at all, because it adds to neither second moment. On the right is the effect a bolt group cannot have: the piles share ground, so the stress bulbs overlap and the group settles 3.9 times as much as a single pile at the same load per pile, rising to 14.2 for 144 of them. The capacity check everyone makes — block failure against the sum of the piles — comes out at 4.54 here and does not govern at all. The check nobody tabulates is the one that does. Structural form

Nine piles, and four times the settlement

A pile cap divides its load between its piles by the same three terms a bolt group uses and a section under biaxial bending uses. What a bolt group does not have is neighbours it shares ground with — and the group effect that matters is not the strength check everybody makes, but a stiffness effect nobody tabulates.

The lining that carries less for being weaker. Bending moment and hoop thrust in a circular lining, against the lining's own bending stiffness, both as fractions of the free-ring values. The ground arrives already stressed — 500 kPa vertically and 300 horizontally at K₀ = 0.6 — and the difference between them tries to squash the hole into an ellipse. A lining stiff enough to refuse absolutely collects the whole distortion pressure, p₂R²/3 = 300 kNm/m; one flexible enough to go with the ground collects nothing, because there is no curvature change left to resist. The thrust is the flat line: it comes from the mean stress rather than the difference, so it does not move at all. Putting 8 joints in this ring drops the moment to 34% of the solid one and leaves the thrust exactly where it was, which is why a segmental lining is jointed and why the intuition carried over from a beam is inverted here. Structural form

The lining that is stronger for being weaker

A tunnel lining is not loaded. The ground arrives already stressed and the hole wants to squash into an ellipse; the lining's only job is to refuse, and how much moment it collects depends entirely on how hard it refuses. Make it stiffer and it takes more. Make it flexible — put joints in it, make it thin — and it takes almost none, while the hoop thrust it carries does not move at all.

The force nobody applied, and the speed it wins at. Lateral force per unit weight for a vehicle on a 400 m curve, against speed. The rising curve is what the free body demands — v²/gR, which is the body's own acceleration written on the other side of the equation — and the flat line is what 6.0° of cant supplies from the weight. They cross at 73 km/h, which is the speed the curve was set out for; below it the deficiency has the other sign and the rail is pushed the other way. The upper line is overturning, at b/2h = 0.399 — and there is no mass in that number, so a loaded vehicle and an empty one go over at the same 160 km/h and only the height of the load decides. At the 108 km/h drawn the deficiency is 0.124 of the weight, which is 49 kN on this 40 tonne vehicle. Equilibrium

The force that is really an acceleration

Every other load in this collection is applied by something. This one is applied by nothing at all — it is the body's own acceleration, written on the other side of the equation so that statics can be used on a problem statics has no business with. The move is legitimate, it is a hundred and eighty years old, and it is exactly half done more often than it is done.

Two identical pipes, and one carries three times the other. Load per metre on a buried conduit against the depth of cover, in trench widths, with the weight of the prism of soil directly above it drawn between them. A conduit laid in a narrow trench is stiffer than nothing and softer than the sides: the backfill settles relative to the undisturbed ground, the friction on the trench walls acts upward, and the conduit gets 64% of the prism. Lay the same conduit on the ground and build an embankment over it and it is now stiffer than the fill beside it, the interior prism settles less, the friction acts downward, and it gets 172% — a factor of 2.71 between two pipes with nothing different but which way the ground moved. The equation is Janssen's, the same one a silo wall obeys, with a trench for a silo; both curves start on the prism line, because with no depth there is no shear to redistribute anything. This is why a flexible pipe is buried rather than a rigid one: making the conduit weaker moves it down the page. Equilibrium

The pipe decides what the soil weighs

A buried conduit is not loaded by the soil above it. It is loaded by whatever share of that soil the relative movement leaves it — and which way the shear on the sides of the prism acts depends on whether the conduit settles more or less than the ground beside it. Two identical pipes under identical fill, one carrying two thirds of the prism and one carrying nearly twice it.

The check that depends on a date. Total deflection and the deflection occurring after the brittle finishes are built, for one 12 m beam, against the day those finishes go up. The total barely moves — the beam ends up where it ends up. The increment falls from 32 mm at a week to 14 mm at a year, because creep is fast at first and slow later and a partition built early inherits nearly all of it: 44% of the final creep has already happened by day 28. The span/500 limit is 24 mm and the span/250 limit is 48; this beam passes the first only after day 25. Camber subtracts from both terms of the difference and therefore changes the upper curve and not the lower one, which is the reason a cambered beam can satisfy every total-deflection check and still crack the wall. Deflection

The limit that depends on a date

Total deflection can nearly always be met, and on a long span it is met with camber. The limit that actually decides the member is the other one — the deflection occurring after the brittle finishes are built — and camber does nothing for it whatever, because it is subtracted from both terms of a difference. The same beam passes or fails on the day the partitions went up.

Five millimetres short, and a hundred kilonewtons in every member. An X-braced bay 6 m by 4 m in which one diagonal was fabricated 5 mm short, with the force that leaves in every member. Nothing is applied to this frame. The forces are the self-stress state the frame's one redundancy supports, scaled so that the diagonal is pulled back to the length it should have been: tension in both diagonals at 100 kN, compression in the four members round the outside, and the whole set in equilibrium with nothing. That is 25% of the force the diagonal was sized to carry, and it is there for the life of the structure. Take one diagonal out and the frame becomes determinate: the short member then simply puts the joint somewhere else, and the structure is in the wrong place instead of under stress. Redundancy is bought, and this is the price. Connections

Built to the wrong length

A redundant structure's members do not have independent lengths. Choose all but one and geometry decides the last, so a member made a different length has to be pulled or pushed into place — and the force required stays in the structure for as long as the structure does. Nothing has been applied to it, there is no load case and no factor, and the members are carrying real force.

All themes